 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / September 2005PRK vs. LASIK corrective surgery
I'm considering undergoing laser surgery for my eyes. I was told that I'm a good candidate for both PRK and LASIK operations, so I am in interested in the differences betwen these operations. To sum my research up, it seems that with PRK there is less chance for complications (since no flap is cut in the cornea), at the expense of experiencing (severe) pain after the operation and having the vision improve gradually. My question, is this accurate? I was told by a doctor that many physicians are moving from LASIK to PRK because of the possible complications -- is that correct? All things being equal (and assuming I don't mind the pain) which operation is better, in the sense that there is less chance for complications and future problems? I'd appreciate any informed opinions, thanks! > I'm considering undergoing laser surgery for my eyes. > I was told that I'm a good candidate for both PRK and LASIK operations, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I'd appreciate any informed opinions, thanks! I agree with everything you said up to a point, and that point is that anything above -6.00 tips in favor of LASIK. DrG There is a move back toward PRK for thin corneas, or other conditions that might make LASIK risky. But if you have no such problems, LASIK may be better, even safer. w.stacy, o.d. > I'm considering undergoing laser surgery for my eyes. > I was told that I'm a good candidate for both PRK and LASIK operations, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I'd appreciate any informed opinions, thanks! PRK has the following disadvantages: Prolonged healing time with discomfort. Greater chance of infection during the re-epithelialization phase. Greater chance of hazing and diffuse scarring, especially in higher prescriptions. Greater chance of regression in prescriptions over -6. Prolonged use of corticosteroids leads to greater risk of steroid-induced glaucoma. PRK has the following advantages: No risk of DLK or epithelial ingrowth and other interface problems. Less tissue removal and less risk of corneal ectasia, and less damage to corneal nerve plexus. Fewer problems with the epithelium. Better surface optical quality in most cases -- absence of flap striae. No concern about future flap complications such as dislodgement. Some hold that a modification of PRK called LASEK offers some advantages over PRK. Additionally, PRK is approved by the Navy for its SEALS, and I believe also by the Air Force for its pilots. LASIK is only approved by the Army for the infantry. DrG DrG has it right with a minor clarification. The amount of tissue that is removed to effect refractive change is identical in PRK and LASIK, but the big difference is where that tissue is removed. With PRK, LASEK, and Epi-LASIK the tissue is removed on the surface of the cornea, leaving the greatest amount of untouched thickness for stability of the cornea. In LASIK and IntraLASIK the tissue is removed at 100-180 microns down into the cornea under the flap, thus decreasing the amount of stable cornea by that amount. As someone who has had PRK, I can attest the fact that the first six months you will wish you had LASIK, and every month thereafter you will be glad you had PRK. Glenn Hagele Executive Director USAEyes.org "Consider and Choose With Confidence" Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org http://www.USAEyes.org http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org I am not a doctor. Thanks for the clarification. What I meant was the the ablation occurs more superficially with PRK. DrG |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.